Darwinian Theory was the central component of selling Atheism to the youth.

Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, and Sam Harris are among the figures who most regularly appear on the front tables of America"s bookstores and the front pages of our newspapers. And, along with their vigorous defense of atheism, we most often find an equally vigorous defense of evolutionary theory. This is no accident.

With the minority version of atheism, how could they explain the existence of the Cosmos? Without a clear answer to that question, their arguments for atheism failed to gain much traction. So Darwinism became the answer.

---

Non-Darwinism 101

1)There are creatures hundreds of millions of years old caught in amber that look exactly like they do today. Not one darwinian transition in 100's of millions of years?

"Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such thing."
-Charles Darwin

---

Excerpt from article in Huffington Post-

-String theory, loop quantum gravity, causal-set theory: these are just a few of the approaches that theorists have taken. Naturally, proponents of each are convinced the others are misguided or even downright unscientific. But when you take a step back from the dispute, you notice all agree on one essential lesson: the space-time that we inhabit is a construction. It is not fundamental to nature, but emerges from a deeper level of reality.

Consider, also, the big bang. Like black holes, it has always posed something of a paradox. The ordinary laws of physics, operating within time, are inherently unable to explain the beginning of time. According to those laws, something must precede the big bang to set it into motion. Yet nothing is supposed to precede it.

Finally, consider the mysterious phenomena of quantum nonlocality, what Einstein called "spooky action at a distance." Two or more particles can act in a coordinated way, no matter how far apart they may be, and they do so without sending out a sound wave, beaming a radio signal or otherwise communicating across the gap that separates them. The particles behave as though they are not, in fact, separated. And one possible explanation is that the particles are rooted in the deeper level of reality where distance has no meaning.

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/9703656

---

"Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one."
-Albert Einstein

And it isn"t just random 1"s and 0"s either. Bizarrely, the code they found is code which is used in computer browser operating system software.

Specifically; Block Linear Self Dual Error Correcting Code.

Block Linear Self Dual Error Correcting Codes are vital in the exchange of digital information as they monitor code sent and measure it against what"s already know, self-adjusting as required in order to accurately transmit and"receive the correct information.

Evidence-

The more science explores physical reality, the more they become baffled by it.

Physical reality is made up of"sub-atomic particles, but when we get down to this level; the laws of Physics change. Rather than finding something we would expect, something ultimately solid, we find"particles that"are able to"exist in different locations at the same time"

In an interview with Ben Stein, Richard Dawkins, the head of the New Atheist Movement said,"And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer."

(Genesis 16:11-12)
11"The angel of the Lord also said to her:
"You are now pregnant
""""and you will give birth to a son.
You shall name him Ishmael,
""""for the Lord has heard of your misery.
12"He will be a wild beast of a man;
""""his hand will be against everyone
""""and everyone"s hand against him."

(Genesis 17:19-22)
19Then God said, "Yes, but your wife Sarah will bear you a son, and you will call him Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his descendants after him. 20"And as for Ishmael, I have heard you: I will surely bless him; I will make him fruitful and will greatly increase his numbers. He will be the father of twelve rulers, and I will make him into a great nation. 21"BUT my covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you by this time next year." 22"When he had finished speaking with Abraham, God went up from him.

-----

Revelation-
Antichrist renounces Christ

In the hadith (Sahih-Al-Bukhari Bk 73; Num 224) Mohammed said, "The most awful name in Allah"s sight on the Day of Resurrection, will be (that of) a man calling himself Malik Al-Amlak (the King of kings)."

In the hadith (Sahih-Al-Bukhari Bk 73; Num 224) Mohammed said, "The most awful name in Allah"s sight on the Day of Resurrection, will be (that of) a man calling himself Malik Al-Amlak (the King of kings)."

5 points to Pro (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Pro is the only one to make an argument and use sources.

[*Reason for removal*] Both sources and arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter has to do more than state that only one side made either of these " it should be clear that the arguments made supported the resolution, and that the sources given were reliable, i.e. relevant to the resolution.
************************************************************************

6 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to pro for participation. Arguments to pro for offering any. Sources to pro for the same. This vote courtesy of the KDVF Voting Team

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Conduct is insufficiently explained. If the voter is treating rounds from Con as forfeits, it should be clear why that is the case, not just inferred. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter must establish why they are voting for Pro, which means explaining at least to some degree why Pro's arguments affirmed the resolution. If Con's statements never did, it should be clear where he failed. (3) Sources are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to establish that the sources given were reliable, and not just that one side had more (even more than 0) than the other.
************************************************************************

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Con proved very easily that their point of view was just as valid as pro

[*Reason for removal*] Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter has to explain how Con did this, not just state that they did.
************************************************************************